Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31
  1. #21
    Premium User Oly's Avatar
    Weasyl
    oly
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    edmonton
    Gender
    NB/male leaning
    Posts
    307
    Feral also has nothing to do with intelligence. All it means is an animal that either used to be domesticated but is now living in the wild, or an animal descended from one such animal. Humans can become feral too in the right conditions, it has nothing to do with intelligence.

    And the standards should be the same across the board; if visibly defined genitalia shouldn't be in general, it shouldn't matter whether it's on a completely wild quadruped or an intelligent self-aware biped. That may be fine other places, but this is a predominantly furry site and such things have associations within such a community that shouldn't be ignored.

  2. #22
    Regular GreenReaper's Avatar
    Weasyl
    GreenReaper
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    34
    Generally, unless a male animal has an erection or the picture is focused on the genitalia specifically, it's okay for all ages.
    That's one opinion. Personally I don't like how animals just trot around with their junk out there, and while it's hard to stop them doing it in real life, an artist clearly has a choice as to whether to depict their genitals.

    I don't particularly care whether they're Moderate or Mature, but they should be consistent, otherwise you get into arguments about whether that "feral" dog is actually intelligent. If you can't tell just by looking at the artwork, it shouldn't factor into the rating.
    Last edited by GreenReaper; 03-11-2016 at 09:09 PM.

  3. #23
    Regular Flygon's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Flygon
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    65
    I would argue, with regards to the feral problem, that it's largely a 'furry' culture problem. We're too used to seeing everything as porn, regardless of if it is or not. Partially to prevent inconsistencies, partially to keep things 'safe.

    Nevermind that a film suck as Pom Poko is rated merely PG in Australia (the same rating, say, Tangled wound up in). Despite the, uhm, obvious plot elements that translate a bit strangely to Western culture.

    This is very much a furry culture problem, is what I am saying. We're so fucking afraid of ourselves.

  4. #24
    Junior FeyPhoenix's Avatar
    Weasyl
    FeyPhoenix
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Gender
    (she/her)
    Posts
    18
    Well, good luck getting clothes on all the animals in real life out there so that you aren't so offended. Because, furry or not, what you are saying is ridiculous.

  5.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #25
    Sentimental Machine Fiz's Avatar

    Weasyl
    Fiz
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,476
    We had a meeting this weekend to discuss ferals, sheaths and ratings, and this is what we've determined how we will be rating things from now:

    General: Small, nondefined/undetailed sheath bumps

    Moderate: Larger or bulging nondefined/undetailed sheath bumps

    Mature: Defined/detailed sheaths, or sheaths that are more than a mere "bump"

    Explicit: Arousal (erection, fluids)


    If testicles are depicted, they will be considered in the defined/detailed category and would go into at least Mature.

  6. #26
    I missed that there was already a thread about this before I made mine.

    I guess Weasyl is just going to keep covering their ears and screaming "It makes sense to us and that's all that matters!"

  7.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #27
    Retired Staff Tiger's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Tiger
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    grrl
    Posts
    1,287
    Hi, I'm Tiger, one of the moderation team directors on the site. I'd like to address a few points and clear up some misunderstandings.

    First, I don't think it's fair to say that our staff is covering our ears and refusing to listen to things we don't want to hear. This very thread was made because users were unhappy with how we rated some submissions. Staff responded in this thread, cleared things up, and after user discussion, we changed an entire policy based on the incident that brought this thread to life in the first place. The very post above yours, Sangie, was meant to tell our users that we agreed we were being too strict and that we are changing our policy to make more sense and be more fair. We answer tickets in times ranging from the day they are opened, to a few months later (our oldest tickets right now are from January of this year, but we have to make some changes to our current guidelines before they can be closed, so we're waiting on that). Most of our changes to our guidelines come from users coming to staff and telling us, "Hey, this isn't really a good policy." But the very best way to help us reach a more friendly, usable guidelines system is to work with staff without insulting us. So, we're very willing to talk about what might have gone wrong with the recent situation, but I am personally asking that you try not to post insults against us because that's just going to rile up both sides and it will be very difficult to reach a consensus about what would be best for the future of the site.

    We're currently investigating what happened in the recent case to see if an admin made a mistake, or if their actions were warranted. Please keep in mind that this is not the kind of thing that we can solve in an instant. It takes time to gather the team, discuss actions, and discuss where we want to go from there. I understand it is frustrating waiting for an answer, but please understand that the wait is only because we don't want to rush headfirst into a proposed solution that might actually do more harm than help. Another thing to keep in mind is- we are all human, we all make mistakes. Being staff on a website doesn't mean that staff is always right and the users are always wrong. And we understand that- if we make a mistake, we take responsibility for it and try and correct the error in the best way we can. As I said earlier in this post, the case that revived this thread is being discussed between both parties involved, and there is no clear answer at the moment, so right now we're just trying to talk things out to see what can be fixed in the future.

    So, I ask two things if this conversation is to continue: 1) Please be a little more respectful, and don't post insulting content, and 2) Give staff some time to see what we did wrong, how we can fix it, and allow us to make changes to fix it.

    Thank you.

  8.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #28
    Retired Staff Frank LeRenard's Avatar
    Weasyl
    MLR
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Land of the Finns
    Posts
    439
    I thought that the comparison, in the other thread, between number of words in the descriptions of how to rate material amongst the various websites was interesting.

    In some ways you want to try to make things objective, so that it's always clear how any given image should be rated (helps keep staff actions consistent as well), but on the other hand, there are so many possible images it would require an infinitely expanding tome of a manual to keep track of how to deal with each specific case. So it's easy to go overboard with the complexity of the rule system.

    Vagueness can be a benefit in that case, but if you go too vague the rules become a free-for-all, and it becomes much harder to enforce consistently. At some point you reach a level of vagueness where the ratings system might serve no purpose at all or is simply unenforceable.

    So there's a balance to be struck, and I'm not convinced any particular site has exactly found it (and it's probably an asymptotic thing, so that's not meant to insult anybody's system). At least I know ours is a constant work in progress.

  9. #29
    Thanks for the professional reply Frank. Much better than Tiger who decided to take what was said personally and blame a customer for not being nice enough despite being upset becuase of one of his favorite artists was suspended from a website over arbitrary rating issues.

    The fact is, reading through this thread, there was a lot of justification from staff and little to no "oh thanks for the feedback! We should really fix this." Seems like it began talking about animal balls instead of the issue at large: too many categories of rating. It's what leads to frustration when the staff doesn't acknowledge there's a problem.

    Tl;dr thanks Frank =)

  10.   This is the last staff post in this thread.   #30
    Retired Staff Frank LeRenard's Avatar
    Weasyl
    MLR
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Land of the Finns
    Posts
    439
    Well, it wasn't my intention to one-up Tiger's post, which is legitimate (certainly in that your tone has been a bit off-putting, and could easily be construed as aggressive). Also you may notice I'm being defensive, too, in attempting to explain some of the complexities we have to deal with in coming up with a system like this.

    Mostly I just wanted to point out that it was striking to me that our ratings guide has almost an order of magnitude more content in it than other art sites, and I was trying to think of why that might be, which would be the first step needed to fix any problems. I posted it here so folks could get a sense of why it is as complicated as it currently is, and that we're aware it isn't a perfect document and have a pretty much constantly renewing list of changes we want to make.

    It's funny, but doing this kind of work for Weasyl has given me a real sympathy for lawmakers. Feels like a good chunk of it is fortune-telling: how will people interpret this wording, how will people react, how many loopholes did we miss, does this still adhere to our own philosophy for the site? Sometimes it's a real nightmare.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •